Index: Umkc Sdi 2009 Starter Pack Biopower

UMKC SDI 2009
Starter Pack Biopower
Index
SHELL...2-4 Links General5-6 Disability Programs.7 Welfare Programs8 Homeless.9 Statistical Data10 Job Programs...11 Medical General...12 Medical HIV13 Medical Elderly Care...14 Medical Prenatal Care..15 Impact Genocide16 Racism17 Dehumanization.18 Alternative Extensions.19-20 AT: Permutation...21 Affirmative Answer..22-28
1/29
UMKC SDI 2009
Shell 1/4
State control of social services, medical treatment, and welfare program enhance biopoltical control through technical efficiency, surveillance, and statistical calculation. This exercise of disciplinary power creates categories for inclusion and exclusion.
Nielson in 2003 Brett, Globalization and the Biopolitics of Aging CR: The New Centennial Review, Volume 3, Number 2, Summer 2003, pp. 161-186 Lifes unfolding is thus constitutively political or, to put it another way, all politics are at a certain level biopolitics. Not coincidentally does Foucault refer to Aristotles definition as he invents the term biopolitics to describe the integration, at the beginning of the modern era, of natural life into the mechanisms and calculations of state power: For millennia, man remained what he was for Aristotle: a living animal with an additional capacity for political existence; modern man is an animal whose politics places his existence as a living being in question. With this affirmation, Foucault initiates a rethinking of political power outside of traditional juridical and institutional categories, emphasizing instead the concrete ways in which power penetrates the subjects body and shapes the overall biological existence of populations. Central to his understanding of biopolitics is an analysis of the way in which the nation-state, from the period of its emergence in the seventeenth century, rationalized the management of social problems with new, technically efficient means: statistics, police, health regulations, and centralized welfare. Through these mechanisms of power, which Foucault describes as disciplinary, the state moved to ensure obedience to its rule, activating devices of social inclusion and/or exclusion, and structuring the limits and parameters of thought and practice. It is not difficult to see the implications of this notion of disciplinary power, and the related concept of governmentality (which describes the combined orchestration of disciplinary mechanisms with other forms of social agency), for the study of aging. With the emergence of modern biopolitics, the production of knowledge about aging (through medical research, statistical analysis, the human sciences, and the like) becomes intimately linked to the states efforts to regulate its population (to monitor and administer its propagation and growth, and in particular, to manage the economic relations between generations). By highlighting the technological and discursive means by which power invests lifes unfolding, a Foucauldian analysis points not only to the techniques by which the aging body is subjectified but also to the role of gerontological knowledge in these same processes of discipline and rule
2/29
UMKC SDI 2009
Shell 2/4
B. These categories created by the expansion of the States biopolitical control is the root of violence, racism, and mass slaughter.
Foucault in'76
[Michel, Society Must be Defended: Lectures at the College de France, 1975-1976, p. 254-257 Trans. David Macey]
What in fact is racism? It is primarily a way of introducing a break into the domain of life that is under power's control: the break between what must live and what must die. The appearance within the biological continuum of the human race of races, the distinction among races, the hierarchy of races, the fact that certain races are described as good and that others, in contrast, are described as inferior: all this is a way of fragmenting the field of the biological that power controls. It is a way of separating out the groups that exist within a population. It is, in short, a way of establishing a biological type caesura within a population that appears to be a biological domain. This will allow power to treat that population as a mixture of races, or to be more accurate, to treat the species, to subdivide the species it controls, into the subspecies known, precisely, as races. That is the first function of racism: to fragment, to create caesuras within the biological continuum addressed by biopower. Racism also has a second function. Its role is, if you like, to allow the establishment of a positive relation of this type: "The more you kill, the more deaths you will cause" or "The very fact that you
let more die will allow you to live more." I would say that this relation ("If you want to live, you must take lives, you must be able to kill") was not invented by either racism or the modern State. It is the relationship of war: "In order to live, you must destroy your enemies." But racism does make the relationship of war-"If you want to live, the other must die" - function in a way that is completely new and that is quite compatible with the exercise of biopower. On the one hand, racism makes it
possible to establish a relationship between my life and the death of the other that is not a military or warlike relationship of confrontation, but a biological-type relationship: "The more inferior species die out, the more abnormal individuals are elim- inated, the fewer degenerates there will be in the species as a whole, and the more I- as species rather than individual-can live, the stronger I will be, the more vigorous I will be. I will be able to proliferate." The fact that the other dies does not mean simply that I live in the sense that his death guarantees my safety; the death of the other, the death of the bad race, of the inferior race (or the degenerate, or the abnormal) is something that will make life in general healthier: healthier and purer. This is not, then, a military, warlike, or political relationship, but a biological relationship. And the reason this mechanism can come into play is that the enemies who have to be done away with are not adversaries in the political sense of the term; they are threats, either external or internal, to the population and for the population. In the biopower system, in other words, killing or the imperative to kill is acceptable only if it results not in a victory over political adversaries, but in the elimination of the biological threat to and the improvement of the species or race. There is a direct connection between the two. In a normalizing society, race or racism is the precondition that makes killing acceptable. When you have a normalizing society, you have a
power which is, at least superficially, in the first instance, or in the first line a biopower, and racism is the indispensable precondition that allows someone to be killed, that allows others to be killed. Once the State functions in the biopower mode, racism alone can justify the murderous function of the State. So you can understand
the importance-I almost said the vital importance-of racism to the exercise of such a power: it is the precondition for exercising the right to kill. If the power of normalization wished to exercise the old sovereign right to kill, it must become racist. And if, conversely, a power of sovereignty, or in
other words, a power that has the right of life and death, wishes to work with the instruments, mechanisms, and technology of normalization, it too must become racist. When I say "killing," I obviously do not mean simply murder as such, but also every form of indirect murder: the fact of exposing someone to death, increasing the risk of death for some people, or, quite simply, political death, expulsion, rejection, and so on. I think that we are now in a position to understand a number of things. We can understand, first of all, the link that was quickly-I almost said immediately-established between nineteenth-century biological theory and the discourse of power. Basically, evolutionism, understood in the broad sense-or in other words, not so much Darwin's theory itself as a set, a bundle, of notions (such as: the hierarchy of species that grow from a common evolutionary tree, the struggle for existence among species, the selection that eliminates the less fit) naturally became within a few years during the nineteenth century not simply a way of transcribing a political discourse into biological terms, and not simply a way of dressing up a political discourse in scientific clothing, but a real way of thinking about the relations between colonization, the necessity for
Continued on the Next Page
Whenever, in other words, there was a confrontation, a killing or the risk of death, the nineteenth century was quite literally obliged to think about them in the form of evolutionism. And we can also understand why racism should have developed in modern societies that function in the biopower mode; we can understand why racism broke out at a number of .privileged moments, and why they were precisely the moments when the right to take life was imperative. Racism first develops with colonization, or in other words, with colonizing genocide. If you are functioning in the biopower mode, how can you justify the need to kill people, to kill populations, and to kill civilizations? By using the themes of evolutionism, by appealing to a racism. War. How can one not only wage war on one's adversaries
wars, criminality, the phenomena of madness and mental illness, the history of societies with their different classes, and so on.
3/29
UMKC SDI 2009
but also expose one's own citizens to war, and let them be killed by the million (and this is precisely what has been going on since the nineteenth century, or since the second half of the nineteenth century), except by activating the theme of racism? From this point onward, war is about two things: it is not simply a matter of destroying a political adversary, but of destroying the enemy race, of destroying that [sort] of biological threat that those people over there represent to our race. In one sense, this is of course no more than a biological extrapolation from the theme of the political enemy. But there is more to it than that. In the nineteenth century-and this is completely new-war will be seen not only as a way of improving one's own race by eliminating the enemy race (in accordance with the themes of natural selection and the struggle for existence), but also as a way of regenerating one's own race. As more and more of our number die, the race to which we belong will become all the purer
C. The alternative is to reject the affirmative by voting negative: The act of resistance is necessary to identify and create distance between the States use of biopower and its power over the individual.
Hayden in 99 Sara Associate Professor of Communication Studies at The University of Montana, WOMEN'S STUDIES IN COMMUNITY, Spring, p. 30. In his early writings, Foucault focused on the ways in which bio-power subjugated the individual, hence leading some scholars to criticize his work for implying that "the hold of disciplinary power is total." Toward the end of his career, however, Foucault began to emphasize the potential for resistance. Foucault maintained that power relations are everywhere-they are exercised in myriad ways throughout the social field. Yet he also asserted that "as soon as there's a relation of power there's a possibility of resistance. We're never trapped by power: it's always possible to modify its hold, in determined conditions and following a precise strategy." From a Foucauldian perspective, then, resistance does not imply the transcendence of power. Indeed, it is a fallacy to assume that any practice or discourse can take place exterior to relations of power. Rather, resistance lies in bringing to light the ways in which power operates "in an effort to create a critical distance on it." Once we have achieved an understanding of how power functions, we can "modify its hold."
4/29
UMKC SDI 2009
Link Extensions General

Social services that seek to provide health or welfare of the population leads to the expansion of biopolitical control through regulation and manipulation Rayner in 2001 Timothy, Biopower and Technology: Foucault and Heideggers Way of Thinking Contretemps 2, May 2001 http://www.usyd.edu.au/contretemps/2may2001/rayner.pdf At the beginning of the nineteenth century, power takes life in charge, covering the entire surface that stretched...from the body to the population, by a double play of technologies of discipline on the one hand, and technologies of regulation on the other.44 We are henceforth in the realm of biopolitical government. Presiding over processes of birth, death, health, and illness, biopolitical government surveys the global mass in the manner of physician, deploying forms of regulation as required, measures to inculcate positive orientation and productive coordination, institutions to maintain standards of sanitation, public education, and welfare, techniques to activate the indolent, strategies to control forms of dissentdeploying, in short, a broad array of techniques of bioregulation.45 These have the end of establishing economy at the level of population-resource. The word economy, Foucault claims, referred in the sixteenth century to the correct manner of managing individuals, goods and wealth within the family (which a good father is expected to do in relation to his wife, children, and servants) and of making the family fortunes prosper.46 By the nineteenth century, it had come to designate a level of reality proper to the management of statesa complex composed of resources of various kinds, structured not only through a set of relations established between individuals and things (wealth, territory, intellectual and physical resources), but also through those relations that individuals establish with one another, and the relations they establish with themselves.
The States control over the welfare of the population is the epitome of the sovereigns expansion of biopolitical control
Nikolopoulou in 2000 Kalliopi, SubStance, Issue 93 (Volume 29, Number 3), 2000, pp. 124-131 (Review) Homo Sacer: Sovereign Power and Bare Life (review) project Muse. The individual, reduced to the most concrete and animalistic elements of its life, confronts a power that is also reduced to its most disembodied abstraction, to an empty form leaping out of Kafkas narratives. Though initially the mere life of the body was considered as the thing most distant from politics, it turns out that the ultimate criterion of sovereign power consists in the decision over the protection or destruction of a human body. Thus, the founding moment of Western politics consists precisely in putting mere biological life at stake, in a way that renders this life simultaneously subject to welfare promises and death threats. This power over life and death becomes the hallmark of sovereignty. In Agambens words, the production of a biopolitical body is the original activity of sovereign power (6).
5/29
UMKC SDI 2009
Link Extensions General

The affirmative is an example of the State use technological data and surveillance to enhance biopolitical control of a subject by determining distribution and access to resources. Willse in 2008 Craig, (Program in Sociology, The Graduate Center, City University of New York), Universal Data Elements, or the Biopolitical Life of
Homeless Populations Surveillance & Society 5(3): 227-251
In an influential article, Kevin D. Haggerty and Richard V. Ericson designate an emerging surveillant assemblage, or the coming-together of once independent systems of surveillance. One result of this new assemblage is the production of what they and others call the data double: Today . . . we are witnessing the formation and coalescence of a new type of body, a form of becoming which transcends human corporeality and reduces flesh to pure information. Culled from the tentacles of the surveillant assemblage, this new body is our data double, a double which involves the multiplication of the individual, the constitution of an additional self (Poster 1990:97). Data doubles circulate in a host of different centres of calculation and serve as markers for access to resources, services and power in ways which are often unknown to its referent (Haggerty and Ericson, 2000:613). Here, Haggerty and Ericson offer an alternative understanding of information technologies such as HMIS. Pointing to not only the diffusion, but also the linking up, of surveillance technologies across the social, they argue that the surveillant assemblage does more than spy upon past actions, as is often the expressed fear of surveillance technologies. Rather, these technologies orient toward the future, determining the distribution of access to resources and life chances in arenas of health, education, employment, consumption and civic life.
6/29
UMKC SDI 2009
Link Extensions Disability Programs

The concept of the disabled is a social construct used to show delineation from the norm for the purposes of exercising biopolitical control over what society considers the abnormal Galvin in 2006 Rose (Professor Murdoch Univeristy, Australia) A genealogy of the disabled identity in relation to work and sexuality Disability & Society Vol. 21, No. 5, August 2006, pp. 499512 The disabled identity is a particularly illuminating site of subjectification because it has been designed to function as a counterpoint to the norm. Thomson (1997, p. 8) frames this position elegantly when she devises the concept of the normate, the superior pole of a binary which names the failed subject position of cultural self, the figure outlined by the array of deviant others whose marked bodies shore up the normates boundary. The antithetical positioning of disability against the norm has been highlighted in a recent qualitative research project which reveals that work and sexuality are primary sites of identity loss for disabled people (Galvin, 2005a). In keeping with these insights, I will show how welfare reform and sexual rehabilitation currently function as technologies of the self, which strive to maintain this framework of normalisation and, as such, to maintain firm boundaries between the affiliated and the marginalised in contemporary society (Rose, 1996b, p. 340). But first it is necessary to trace the genealogy of disability in relation to the concepts of work and sexuality Disability programs seek to normalize disabled people so they may be controlled through governmental programs. Galvin in 2006 Rose (Professor Murdoch Univeristy, Australia) A genealogy of the disabled identity in relation to work and sexuality Disability & Society Vol. 21, No. 5, August 2006, pp. 499512 Yet, at the same time that it was perceived as a threat to the social order, disability was vital to its delineation and maintenance. Over the past two centuries, disability has retained its integral connection with work. In particular, the medicalisation of disability has been embedded in a framework that aims to rehabilitate or normalise people with impairments so that they become capable of participating in the workforce and, as a consequence, are able to develop the qualities of self-sufficiency, health, wealth and consumerism that define the ideal citizen. It has also allowed for the dividing practices that originally incarcerated disabled people in institutions to operate within the greater community, lessening the need for such overt forms of physical exclusion. And, as disabled people emerge[d] from the closed fortresses in which they once functioned and [began] to circulate in a free state, the methods of control over their subjectification became more flexible and more diffuse (Foucault, 1977b, p. 211).
7/29
UMKC SDI 2009
Link Extensions Welfare Reform

Welfare reform is the means by which government seeks to facilitate the reorientation of long term unemployed citizens to occupations for the purposes of government control of their bodies for the purpose of production Galvin in 2006 Rose (Professor Murdoch Univeristy, Australia) A genealogy of the disabled identity in relation to work and sexuality Disability & Society Vol. 21, No. 5, August 2006, pp. 499512 The two most salient technologies through which the processes of subjectification can be understood in relation to work and sexuality operate through welfare reform policy and the literature focused on sexual rehabilitation. Both forms of intervention in the lives of disabled people can be seen to be technologies of the self because they have been devised to
permit individuals to effect by their own means or with the help of others a certain number of operations on their own bodies and souls, thoughts, conduct, and way of being, so as to transform themselves in order to attain a certain state of happiness, purity, wisdom, perfection, or immortality. (Foucault, 1988a, p. 18)
As such, welfare reform can be seen to be aimed at facilitating the restoration of passive, dependent individuals who are at risk of long term unemployment to their roles as active citizens so that they can once again define themselves as occupationally engaged and self-reliant. Similarly, the sexual counselling and self-help literature intends to facilitate the development of improved body-esteem, sexual-esteem and sexual technique in accordance with the norms surrounding sexuality. Both appear to offer emancipatory potential and access to positive forms of identification, which could ultimately lead to the disappearance of disability in its social model sense. However, as will become evident, these technologies have limited power to achieve what they promise because they remain individualistic, paternalistic and normative and, thus, are more inclined to perpetuate the disabling of identity than to challenge it.
Welfare reform creates categories of individuals based on ability to work. This allows for identity construction necessary to enhance biopolitical control. Galvin in 2006 Rose (Professor Murdoch Univeristy, Australia) A genealogy of the disabled identity in relation to work and sexuality Disability & Society Vol. 21, No. 5, August 2006, pp. 499512 Since the early 1980s, income support systems have increasingly come under attack because, it is claimed, they produce a form of dependency and passivity which is self-perpetuating and highly damaging to the life chances of welfare recipients (FaCS, 2000a, 2000b). Rose touches on this view in the following description of the subject of welfare reform as construed by neoliberalism. [T]hey are
people whose self-responsibility and self-fulfilling aspirations have been deformed by the dependency culture, whose efforts at self-advancement have been frustrated for so long that they suffer from "learned helplessness, whose self esteem has been destroyed. (Rose, 1996a, p. 59) However, while it is claimed that this view is conducive to the enrichment
of freedom and opportunity, it opens the way for victim blaming, such that those who fail to achieve independence through employment are accused of lacking the qualities necessary for selfactualisation. As OMalley (1996, p. 202) argues, the unemployed have a responsibility to upgrade their skills, self-esteem and marketability and, if they do not succeed and continue to rely on the
8/29
UMKC SDI 2009
state to deal with the harmful effects of known, calculable and individually manageable risks, they can only be perceived as feckless and culpable.
9/29
UMKC SDI 2009
Link Extensions Homeless

The tracking of homeless populations through technological surveillance expands biopolotical control of the homeless subject as separate from the general population Willse in 2008 Craig, (Program in Sociology, The Graduate Center, City University of New York), Universal Data Elements, or the Biopolitical Life of
Of course, what HUD considers an information technology, others would consider a technology of surveillance.6 Early critics of HUDs program pointed in Orwellian terms to the Big Brother feel of the program, accusing the government of spying upon and tracking a vulnerable population. HUDs response to these accusations emphasizes that its program does not create a national database of homeless people. Databases are maintained at local levels by Continuums of Care, formalized networks of agencies providing homeless services within a community (See Wong et al, 2006 and Lyon-Callo, 2004:11-23) that may determine what information is shared amongst agencies. HUD, in turn, only collects data at the aggregate level, not at the level of the individual case. The names and social security numbers of clients, for example, remain at the local level. While this attends to some of the privacy concerns of clients, advocates and critics of surveillance technologies alike, we should nonetheless ask what, if not a national database, HUD is in fact creating. I argue that its formation of the universal data element is not only HUDs unique contribution to HMIS, but its contribution to surveillance systems and governance more broadly. I hope to show that the universal data element acts as a connector between two technological forms central to governance todaythe database and the networkand thereby allows data to be simultaneously local and national, public and anonymous, databased and networked. As such, the universal data element is significant not as a discrete object, but as a force for arranging technical relationships between technologies, agencies, clients, and HUD. I will furthermore argue that if we understand HUDs HMIS program in terms of surveillance technologies, it is a form of surveillance not only or even primarily interested in the individual homeless person. If, following one move in surveillance studies, we understand surveillance technologies as constitutive of the very objects they track, we must ask what is constituted, produced or organized by HUDs HMIS program. This case suggests that as a mechanism of governance, or a productive technology, the HMIS program organizes and makes available for intervention a homeless population that exceeds the individual, but in which the individual is caught up. The privacy concerns raised by critics are not irrelevant, and they have played a role in shaping the universal data elements. But ultimately, the protections provided do not attend to a form of politics operating on a register other than the individual subject with a claim to privacy. Confronting the politics of homeless population surveillance requires concerns beyond individual rights Social services for the homeless is an example of governments use of biopolitical control over a population
Willse in 2008 Craig, (Program in Sociology, The Graduate Center, City University of New York), Universal Data Elements, or the Biopolitical Life of
Individual experiences of finding and maintaining appropriate shelter, or accessing income necessary for survival, are absorbed into a governance mechanism in which the regulation of the poor, to borrow Piven and Clowards phrase, functions not only as social control, but also as a mechanism for the regulation of social services. Being a target of homeless social services here becomes a kind of labor used to produce a population for governance and as governance.
10/29
UMKC SDI 2009
Link Extensions Statistical Data

Statistical data used to monitor and administer populations is the root of biopolitics in the modern era. Rayner in 2001 Timothy, Biopower and Technology: Foucault and Heideggers Way of Thinking Contretemps 2, May 2001 http://www.usyd.edu.au/contretemps/2may2001/rayner.pdf
In terms of the genealogy of biopolitical government, the emergence of disciplinary power was only one part of a double development. The second pole of developmentformed somewhat later than the first41arose on the basis of the objectification of human beings attendant on disciplinary power. Biopolitical government requires this process of objectification, this institutional generation of bodies as manipulable objects. It is only on the basis of the objectification of human beings on the level of their biological traits that government can assume the task of the administration of life. In the eighteenth century, the science of statisticswhich had previously functioned within a monarchical administrative apparatus concerned primarily with the management of state resources42was turned to the analysis of the state population. With the application of statistical techniques to the government of populations, a new form of political management came into being: one no longer focussed upon the body of the individual, but:on the species body,...propagation, births and mortality, the level of health, life-expectancy and longevity, with all the conditions that can cause these to vary. Their supervision was effected through an entire series of interventions and regulatory controls: a bio-politics of the population.43
Statistical analysis or collection of data to measure health and well-being of population leads to generalizations about categories of individuals necessary to increase biopolitics Willse and Spade in 2005 Craig (Student in Sociology at the Graduate Center New School New York) Dean Transgender Attorney) Freedom in A Regulatory State 11 Widener L Rev. 309 Found Online
11/29
UMKC SDI 2009
Link Extensions Job Programs

Job training or employment assistance is a form of biopolitical control used to push individuals into easily recognizable categories of rational labor producers. Galvin in 2006 Rose (Professor Murdoch Univeristy, Australia) A genealogy of the disabled identity in relation to work and sexuality Disability & Society Vol. 21, No. 5, August 2006, pp. 499512 Obviously work has always played an important role in defining peoples lives and ensuring their survival. The difference in the modern era is that work has taken on a new shape and become immersed in a particular ideological framework and regime of disciplinary mechanisms. Foucault (1980a) argues that, while work has always had a productive function, in the modern era it has taken on two additional functions, the symbolic function and the function of dressage, or discipline (p. 161). Those who could not participate in this new social realm could only be seen to be lacking the symbolic and disciplinary qualities of the autonomous, rational, market-driven liberal subject and thus were defined as aberrant. As Jolly (2000, p. 796) argues, [t]he administrative categories of able to work and unable to work [were developed] to identify those who because they did not, or could not, participate in the central system of work were a threat to the social order
12/29
UMKC SDI 2009
Link Extensions Medical (General)

The affirmative extends medical benefits to a diseased other to control and manipulate them SINHA 2000
ARUSH, Department of Family Medicine University of North Texas Health Science Center at Fort Worth Department of Anthropology Southern Methodist University Medical Anthropology Quarterly, New Series, Vol. 14, No. 3 (Sep., 2000), pp. 291-309, The Virtual Gaze of Health Care in the Next Century
A structural approach to understanding health care describes the local and global public and private sector interests that inform it. It is a means of understanding the ways in which patients' and health care providers' choices are circumbscribed (Anagnost 1995; Morsy 1995; Navarro 1981; Pearce 1995; Singer et al. 1990). In biomedical systems, the healer is the mediator between the elite and the non-elite, a "locus of hegemony," and health and disease are defined by the elite for the purposes of controlling the non-elite (Csordas 1988; Gramsci 1971). Medicine often defines the "Other" as diseased or unhygienic and, in doing so, places it under medical control, effecting a means by which to enforce an amassed set of Euroamerican middle-class values (Douglas 1966; Jacobus 1990). Like Foucault, political economists are interested in the history of power and the medical establishment. Power is manifested at various levels in the construction of health. From an anthropologist' s perspective, biomedicine is merely one more ethnomedical system that both has its genesis in and derives its sustenance from Western political, economic, and ideological institutions (Foster and Anderson 1974). Navarro (1981) describes biomedicine as an extension of capitalist machinations. In biomedicine, the emphasis is upon the worker and the mechanisms of capitalism, namely production (Martin 1991; Reid and Reynolds 1990). One methodological approach to
political economy is to use Frank's (1967) model, in which the metropolis (core) exploits the satellite (periphery) regions for all types of resources, especially labor, capital, and raw material. With respect to the present inquiry, some of the questions raised by this approach are: (1) how has telemedicine affected the process of centralization with respect to capital flows? (2) to what extent do patient health categories correspond with the biomedical definitions and to what extent have they been modified by telemedicine? and (3) how is telemedicine informed by the current political and economic climate of health care; specifically, who owns the means of health care production? These questions become more complex as those involved in the production of health care become spatially removed from its delivery.
New medical technology designed to incorporate rural and poor populations allows increased government control and surveillance SINHA 2000
ARUSH, Department of Family Medicine University of North Texas Health Science Center at Fort Worth Department of Anthropology Southern Methodist University Medical Anthropology Quarterly, New Series, Vol. 14, No. 3 (Sep., 2000), pp. 291-309, The Virtual Gaze of Health Care in the Next Century
The ability to communicate instantaneously across great distances has definite implications for health care. Previously, the concept of deterritorialization has been applied to the decoupling of cultures from geographic limitations, for exam ple, in migration studies (Appadurai 1991; Basch et al. 1994). Few have looked at the effects of such a phenomenon on health and the health industry. The deterritorialization trend in health care is not sustainable if the hospital or clinic provides spatial and containment functions, such as quarantine (Foucault 1963). Communication has always been a facet of health care, but new technology has made communication much cheaper and now allows biomedicine to interact with previously "remote" populations (Marcus 1995). As Appadurai writes, ethnography describes the new definitions of "locality, as a lived experience, in a globalized, de territorialized world" (1991:196) and allows for the construction of new, virtual "imagined communities" (Anderson 1983). In this instance, a multisite analysis not only studies the attributes of separate sites, but also the vital quality of the link ages among them (Marcus 1995). The ability to deterritorialize or decouple location from function has surprising effects. First, while the purpose of telemedicine is ostensibly to reach into rural areas, it has done so at the cost of further concentrating health specialists and health resources into the urban areas (Morazin 1997). The second effect, related to the first, is that telemedicine has the ability to further isolate certain populations, such as reservation-based Native Americans or prisoners in correctional facilities (Bashshur 1997; Bhatara 1995; Hipkins 1997). As more and more clinic functions go on-line, become virtual, how are the classically defined functions of a clinic affected? How does a virtual clinic achieve containment? Can surveillance and education functions (e.g., "grand rounds") be performed virtually? There is evidence to suggest that clinics are becoming more and more deterritorialized as technologically wealthy institutions seek to spread their influence from the urban into the rural areas. I now turn to a discussion of the current health care environment to which the aforementioned theoretical perspectives might be applied.
13/29
UMKC SDI 2009
Link Extensions Medical (HIV)

Social services for HIV ensure and legitimate government control of infected populations through separation, surveillance, and stigmatization. Taylor in 1998
Tonya Nicole Taylor, Professor African Studies University of Pennsylvania, "Blaming the Infected African Other: An Epidemic of Discrimination"(Paper presented at the Sixth Annual African Studies Consortium Workshop, October 02, 1998), http://www.africa.upenn.edu/Workshop/tonya98.html,
In "What's Wrong with this Picture? The Hegemonic Construction of Culture in AIDS Research in the United States," Glick Schiller (1992) challenges the culturally biased representations of AIDS and the hegemonic processes through which risk-groups have been constructed in the past. Glick Schiller (1992: 240) argues that the boundaries used by epidemiologist to create these high-risk populations "do not grow immediately and automatically out of epidemiological research"; instead, they are produced under specific social and cultural contexts, which are then extended to other contexts based on the assumption that epidemiological categories are universal. The tendency to stereotype cultural behavior within risk-groups has, according to Glick Schiller, "reified the concept of culture, overgeneralizing the behavior of internally diverse categories of persons within a defined subcategory"(1992:250). Epidemiological discourse on HIV risk-groups is inherently reductionistic, offering only one explanation for what is a complex socioepidemiological phenomenon. Such an approach is questionable because it presents risk-groups as an undifferentiated whole. Furthermore, Glick Schiller et al (1994) argue that it is a "Risky Business" to use the concept of culture to characterize "high risk-groups" because it socially "distances and subordinates" those designated as `at risk' of infection and fuels a "denial of personal risk" for those defined outside of the designated risk-groups (1994: 1337). This use of western culture to define HIV risk not only transforms the objective, and supposedly unbiased category of 'risk-group' into stigmatizing and alienating stereotypes, it also impairs efforts to prevent the spread of the virus by diverting attention away from the real risk behaviors, such as unprotected sex and the sharing of IV drug needles. The CDC's decision to include Haitian nationality as a high-risk group demonstrates not only the hegemonic power of biomedical discourse or the power of authoritative statements in general (regardless of its veracity), it also illustrates the profound impact these statements can have on social action and perceptions.
14/29
UMKC SDI 2009
Link Extensions Medical Asst. for the Elderly

Medicalization and control over aging populations is a form of disciplinary control and governmenatlity which perpetuates biopolitical control of an aging population Nielson in 2003 Brett, Globalization and the Biopolitics of Aging CR: The New Centennial Review, Volume 3, Number 2, Summer 2003, pp. 161-186 Not surprisingly, Foucaults arguments have proved influential within critical gerontology, which admonishes mainstream gerontology for its narrow scientificity and endorses reflexive methodologies imported from the humanities, pointing to the historical and discursive construction of knowledge about the aging process. It is not uncommon for critical gerontologists to refer to Foucaults notions of disciplinary power and/or governmentality when accounting for the medicalization of the aging body or the establishment of institutions, government agencies, and professions for the care of the elderly. Criticizing the gender assumptions inherent in traditional medical approaches to aging, Harper invokes Foucaults concept of disciplinary technologies to claim that control is attained by producing new norms of later life based on a medical solution to physical and mental decay. Similarly, Higgs acknowledges the relevance of Foucaults idea of governmentality . . . which can be extended to inform the current debates about citizenship and older people. But the most thoroughgoing application of Foucauldian thought to the study of aging is Stephen Katzs Disciplining Old Age, which analyzes the techniques used by administrative powers to problematize aged subjects and the games of truth and depth employed by gerontology to know them. The strictness of Katzs adherence to Foucault is evidenced by his claim that the prospects of a Foucauldian gerontology quickly become apparent if the word age is substituted in Foucaults captivating phrases on sex and sexuality. As the title suggests, Disciplining Old Age focuses on the disciplinary mechanisms by which the production of gerontological knowledge requires the subjectification of aging bodies. To substantiate his arguments, Katz turns to Foucaults account of disciplinary power in The History of Sexuality. While this emphasis on disciplinarity allows him to examine how gerontology articulates the knowledge of old age in various ways, it also limits his attention to another important aspect of Foucaults work, one that remains latent in the volumes on sexuality and is brought to light by later commentatorsthat is, the argument concerning the passage from disciplinary society to the society of control.
15/29
UMKC SDI 2009
Link Extension Medical (Prenatal Care)

Pre-Natal Care leads to state control of health and welfare through comprehensive regulation of the body Bridges in 2008 Khiara (Ph.D. Candidate, Northwestern U.), NORTHWESTERN JOURNAL OF LAW AND SOCIAL POLICY, Winter 2008, 66. Following Foucault, prenatal care presents itself as an occasion par excellence for the state to "administer, optimize, and multiply" life, to subject the body to "precise controls and comprehensive regulations," and to ultimately gain a modicum of control over "the level of health" of the population. STATE-BASED PRENATAL CARE IS A VEHICLE FOR BRINGING PREGNANT WOMEN AND THEIR FETUSES UNDER STATES BIOPOLITICAL CONTROL Bridges in 2008 Khiara, (Ph.D. Candidate, Northwestern U.), NORTHWESTERN JOURNAL OF LAW AND SOCIAL POLICY, Winter 2008, 66-67. Yet, pregnancy is not a legal event. That is, the fact of pregnancy alone does not put the pregnant woman within the jurisdiction of the biopolitical state. While the state may desire to exercise its "power over life" by submitting the expectant mother and her fetus to "an entire series of interventions and regulatory controls," the pregnant woman is not compelled to surrender herself to such a state project. Again, this is because, at present, the fact of pregnancy alone does not enable the state to reach the woman and her pregnant body with its biopolitical power. The biopolitical state could achieve the regulation of every pregnant woman by creating a law that mandates that women receive prenatal care either from state actors or from persons that must otherwise answer to the state. However, at present, such a law does not exist. Indeed, there is no law in the United States that makes criminal or otherwise penalizes a woman's failure to submit herself to any kind of prenatal care during her pregnancy. That is, should a woman undergo the forty weeks of pregnancy without ever having sought and/or received medical care from a physician, nurse practitioner, midwife, or other professional whose services are intended to ensure the birth of a healthy baby and the continued health of the new mother, I am not aware of any law that punishes such a woman's behavior, or lack thereof. In Colorado, a woman who exposes her fetus to controlled substances may be found to have neglected her child and, consequently, lose custody of the infant. And, of course, once a baby is born, there are a wealth of laws that punish a woman for directly harming or failing to protect her child. But, prior to a baby's birth, there is no law that penalizes a woman for "failing to protect" her not-yet-born child by neglecting or otherwise refusing to have a medically-managed pregnancy.
16/29
UMKC SDI 2009
Impact Extension - Genocide

The ability for the state to manage the health and well-being of the body is the root of wars and genocide. Giving the power over life to the state legitimizes extermination Foucault 1978
[The History of Sexuality Vol. 1] Since the classical age the West has undergone a very profound transformation of these mechanisms of power. Deduction has tended to be no longer the major form of power but merely one element among others, working to incite, reinforce, control, monitor, optimize, and organize the forces under it: a power bent on generating forces, making them grow, and ordering them, rather than one dedicated to impeding them, making them submit, or destroying them. There has been a parallel shift in the right of death, or at least a tendency to align itself with the exigencies of a life-administering power and to define itself accordingly. This death that was based on the right of the sovereign is now manifested as simply the reverse of the right of the social body to ensure, maintain, or develop its life. Yet wars were never as bloody as they have been since the nineteenth century, and all things being equal, never before did regimes visit such holocausts on their own populations. But this formidable power of deathand this is perhaps what accounts for part of its force and the cynicism with which it has so greatly expanded its limitsnow presents itself as the counterpart of a power that exerts a positive influence on life, that endeavors to administer, optimize, and multiply it, subjecting it to precise controls and comprehensive regulations. Wars are no longer waged in the name of a sovereign who must be defended; they are waged on behalf of the existence of everyone; entire populations are mobilized for the purpose of wholesale slaughter in the name of life necessity: massacres have become vital. It is as managers of life and survival, of bodies and the race, that so many regimes have been able to wage so many wars, causing so many [people] to be killed. And through a turn that closes the circle, as the technology of wars has caused them to tend increasingly toward all-out destruction, the decision that initiates them and the one that terminates them are in fact increasingly informed by the naked question of survival. The atomic situation is now at the end point of this process: the power to expose a whole population to death is the underside of the power to guarantee an individuals continued existence. The principle underlying the tactics of battlethat one has to be capable of killing in order to go on livinghas become the principle that defines the strategy of states. But the existence in question is no longer the juridical existence of sovereignty; at stake is the biological existence of a population. If genocide is indeed the dream of modern powers, this is not because of a recent return of the ancient right to kill; it is because power is situated and exercised at the level of life, the species, the race, and the large-scale phenomena of population.
THE STATES ABILITY TO CONTROL THE BODY IS THE ROOT OF WAR, VIOLENCE, AND GENOCIDE Rabinow in 94 Paul, Professor of Anthropology, Berkeley, THE FOUCAULT READER, 1984, p. 260
It is as managers of life and survival, of bodies and the race, that so many regimes have been able to wage so many wars, causing so many men to be killed. And through a turn that closes the circle, as the technology of wars has caused them to tend increasingly toward all-out destruction, the decision that initiates them and the one that terminates them are in fact increasingly informed by the naked question of survival. The atomic situation is now at the end point of this process: the power to expose a whole population to death is the underside of the power to guarantee an individual's continued existence. The principle underlying the tactics of battle-that one has to be capable of killing in order to go on living-has become the principle that defines the strategy of states. But the existence in question is no longer the juridical existence of sovereignty; at stake is the biological existence of a population. If genocide is indeed the dream of modem powers, this is not because of a recent return of the ancient right to kill; it is because power is situated and exercised at the level of life, the species, the race, and the large-scale phenomena of population
17/29
UMKC SDI 2009
Impact Extension Racism

Biopolitics creates places individuals into categories of value and then allows for the elimination of those not deemed valuable. This is the root of racist ideology
WHYTE 2004 (PHD CANDIDATE @ MONASH U STATE OF EMERGENCY AVAIL) <JESS, THE HUMAN IS A BATTLEFIELD, ONLINE> In his 1976 lecture series at the College de France, Society Must be Defended, Foucault Pointed to racism as that which reinscribes the right to kill in the sphere of a state supposedly committed to the fostering of, and care for, life. Foucault argues that in the biopower systemkilling or the imperative to kill is acceptable only if it results not in a victory over political adversaries but in the elimination of the biological threat to and the improvement of the species or race. 3 As Foucault points out, war today has two functions: it exists not only to destroy a political adversary but also to destroy the biological threat, to destroy the sort of threat that those people over there represent to our race. It is in this context that we should view the recent warnings by a senior British military officer that the US occupying forces in Iraq view the Iraqi population as untermenschen (subhuman). In the context of Iraq, we see how this mobilisation of a biological discourse, which as Foucault points out is simply reinscribed onto the notion of the political enemy, is utilised to deadly effect, justifying the indiscrimate targeting of a civilian population conceived as both enemy and subhuman threat, and undoubtedly contributing to the torture, degradation and humiliation of Iraqi prisoners.
18/29
UMKC SDI 2009
Impact Extension Dehumanization

Biopoolitics makes life calculable Once we begin to calculate life we necessary must eliminate that which has no value. This is the root of violence Dillon in 99
Michael Dillon, Professor Political Theory at Lancaster, Political theory, Another Justice, 1999, p. 165
Economies of evaluation necessarily require calculability. Thus no valuation without mensuration and no mensuration without indexation. Once rendered calculable, however, units of account are necessarily submissible not only to valuation but also, of course, to devaluation. Devaluation, logically, can extend to the point of counting as nothing. Hence, no mensuration without demensuration either. There is nothing abstract about this: the declension of economies of value leads to the zero point of holocaust However liberating and emancipating systems of value-rights-may claim to be, for example, they run the risk of counting out the invaluable. Counted out, the invaluable may then lose its purchase on life. Herewith, then, the necessity of championing the invaluable itself. For we must never forget that, "we are dealing always with whatever exceeds measure:036 But how does that necessity present itself? Another Justice answers: as the surplus of the duty to answer to the claim of Justice over rights. That duty, as with the advent of another Justice, is integral to the lack constitutive of the human way of being. The event of this lack is not a negative experience. Rather, it is an encounter with a reserve charged with possibility. As possibility, it is that which enables life to be lived in excess without the overdose of actuality.37 What this also means is that the human is not decided. It is precisely undecidable. Undecidability means being in a position of having to decide without having already been fully determined and without being capable of bringing an end to the requirement for decision.
Biopower views humans as a resource void of any intrinsic utility. Boleau in 2000, Philosophy Professor, Seattle U, GENUINE RECIPROCITY AND GROUP AUTHENTICITY, 2000, p. 27 According to Foucault, in the current era of bio-power, there is a strong voice in our culture that views the body as a resource or a machine. Knowledge of the body causes the bodys dispersion into a complex myriad of political strategies and techniques. In contrast to Aristotelian man, who was (for some) self-grounded, Foucault sees modern man as animal whose politics places his existence as a living being in question. In other words, Foucault sees individuals as social creations: no individual is his or her own ground.
19/29
UMKC SDI 2009
Alternative Extensions
Localized resistance to biopolitical control can be successful at reducing the power of the state to regulate the body. Boileau in 2000, Philosophy Professor, Seattle, GENUINE RECIPROCITY AND GROUP AUTHENTICITY, 2000, p. 60
Based on Taylors reading of Foucault, this search for truth of the self is futile and does not net any knowledge that is independent of the power regime. But Foucault believes that we can recognize increases in liberation (which is synonymous with freedom), if we dispense with the search for truth and focus on a new kind of resistance. For Foucault, resistance can be accomplished locally, by the insurrection of subjugated knowledges and by plebian resistance. As explained in Chapter Three, plebeian resistance acts as the limit and as an inherent counter-effect to the effects of power. But plebian resistance does not expose any kind of independent or ultimate truth. It only exposes and rearranges power relations. With regard to exposing any kind of ultimate truth, local resistance suffers from the dame deficiency as global transformation they both cannot overcome the fact that truth is regime-relative. This plebeian resistance combats the modern power-knowledge-subjectivity formation by creating the are of existence where we act ethically according to an aesthetic ideal.
REJECTION AND RESISTANCE CAN SERVE AS A CHALLENGE TO THE ABILITY OF THE STATE TO INCREASE BIOPOLITICAL CONTROL Peter Atterton, philosophy professor, University of California San Diego, HISTORY OF THE HUMAN SCIENCES JOURNAL, 1994, p. http://www.acusd.edu/~atterton/Publications/foucault.htm.
Must we pessimistically assume, therefore, that bio-history, becoming more and more elaborate and powerful, proceeds with more or less unfettered sway without anything being able to interrupt or escape it? The question is not Foucaldian, not least because it presents power as a sovereign unitary force given at the outset. As we have seen, if bio-power can be understood vectorially as having force and direction, dominance and strategy, it is only through the resolution of a complex strategical situation within a societal body as a multiplicity of power relations each with their own local aims and objectives. This does not rule out the possibility of different tactics whose aims would be opposed to dominant alignments as they feature on the side of bio-power. On the contrary, Foucault insists (though it is doubtless in this connection that more research needs to be done) that it is only insofar as opposing tactics 'play the role of adversary, target, support or handle in power relations', that such hegemonic alignments are possible, by which I take him to mean that they serve as a local center around which multifarious disciplinary technologies may coalesce so as eventually to integrate them into an overall strategy of administrative control. All the same, this does not mean that, prior to their being integrated or resolved in this manner - operating within what Deleuze and Guattari have called an 'inclusive disjunction,' such as the 'madman' of anti-psychiatry, the bi-sexual, non-Oedipalized child, and so on - these opposing forces, or what Foucault calls 'resistances,' are to be understood merely as another element in the functioning of power, i.e. 'only a reaction, a rebound, forming with respect to the basic domination an underside that is in the end passive, doomed to perpetual defeat. They are disruptive and serve as the source of power's ultimate instability.
Each individual act of resistance creates a web of revolution necessary to challenge biopolitics Atterton in 94 (Peter, philosophy professor, University of California San Diego) HISTORY OF THE HUMAN SCIENCES JOURNAL, 1994, p. http://www.acusd.edu/~atterton/Publications/foucault.htm.
Foucault considers all these are possible, with appropriate reservations and qualifications: "Are there no great radical ruptures, massive binary divisions, then? Occasionally, yes. But more often one is dealing with mobile and transitory points of resistance, producing cleavages in a society... Just as a network of power relations ends by forming a dense web that passes through apparatuses and institutions, without being exactly localized in them, so too the swarm of points of resistance traverses social stratifications and individual unities. And it is doubtless the strategic codification of these points of resistance that makes a revolution possible, somewhat similar to the way in which the state relies on the institutional integration of power relationships."
20/29
UMKC SDI 2009
Alternative Extensions
Microlevel resistance is most effective form of resistance against biopower. Sawicki 1991
Feminist Scholar, Disciplining Foucault: Feminism, Power, and the Body, pg 24
In other words, by utilizing an ascending analysis Focault shows how mechanisms of power at the microlevel of society have become part of the dominant networks of power relations. Disciplinary power was not invented by the dominant class and then extended down into the microlevel of society. It originated outside this class and was appropriated by it once it revealed its utility. Foucault is suggesting that the connection between power and the economy must be determined on the basis of specific historical analysis. It cannot be deduced from a general theory. He rejects both reductionism and functionalism insofar as the latter involve locating forms of power within a structure or institution which is self regulating. He does not offer causal or functional explanations but rather historical descriptions of the conditions that make certain forms of domination impossible. He identifies the necessary but not sufficient conditions for domination.
21/29
UMKC SDI 2009

AT: Permutations
Attatching Critism to policy goals breeds complacency and gets co-opted Sawicki 1991
Feminist Scholar, Disciplining Foucault: Feminism, Power, and the Body, pg 27-28
Focusing attention on specific situations may lead to more complete analyses of particular struggles and thus to a better understanding of social change. For example, Foucault was involved in certain conflicts within medicine, psychiatry and the penal system. He devised ways for prisoners to participate in discussions of prison reform. His history of punishment was designed to alter our perspectives on the assumptions that inform penal practices. In part, Foucault's refusal to make any universal, political, or moral judgements is based on the historical evidence that what looks like a change for the better may have undesirable consequences. Since struggle is continual and the idea of a power-free society is an abstraction, those who struggle must never grow complacent. Victories are often overturned; changes
may take on different faces over time. Discourses and institutions are ambiguous and may be utilized for different ends. The permutation functions as an act of specialization with Biopolitics. This shields the violence inherent in the system of Biopower which prevents resistance necessary for change Atterton in 94 Peter, University of California San Diego Philosophy Professor (HISTORY OF THE HUMAN SCIENCES JOURNAL, v. 7, http://www.acusd.edu/~atterton/Publications/foucault.htm)
The increasing number of strategies for the administration of bodies since the seventeenth century is concomitant with their becoming more elaborate and specialized according to how the population is sectioned as a general field of inquiry, the local tactics of power immanent to each sector, the reciprocal influence between different sectors, and their attempts to compete with, and distinguish themselves from, each other. Indeed, the tendency towards specialization may itself be seen in the service of a wider strategy, not only to preserve the constitutive knowledges from external criticism, thereby protecting the professional status of the elites who practice them, but, moreover, to hide the deleterious programs of power they run. This is indeed crucial for Foucault, who claims as selfevident that 'power is tolerable only on the condition that it mask a substantial part of itself.
The plans use of the elite to change the biopolitical system will fail to produce meaningful resistance McCubbin in 98 Michael (Ph.D., and David Weisstub, J.D) (MEETING THE NEEDS OF THE MENTALLY ILL, July, p. http://www.academyanalyticarts.org/mccweiss.html) If this is true, the solution to poor policy in the mental health system might seem to involve changing the rules of the policy game - a sort of macro-system engineering. The obvious problem with this is that the people who can change the rules of the game are usually the same who benefit from the current rules. Nevertheless, the American Constitution and the separation of powers among executive, congress and judiciary can at least give rise to the hope, as it did to those who favored litigation in the 1960s and 1970s, that a sort of radical surgical intervention, by means of bringing a constitutional case against an asylum for failing to provide adequate care and treatment, could sufficiently alter the system at a sensitive place as to change the nature of the system
22/29
UMKC SDI 2009
Affirmative Answers - Permutation

Pedagogical and political strategies both locally and centralized are necessary to challenge biower Giroux 2006
College Literature 33.3 [Summer2006] Reading Hurricane Katrina: Race, Class, and the Biopolitics of Disposability Any viable attempt to challenge the biopolitical project that now shapes American life and culture must do more than unearth the powerful antidemocratic forces that now govern American economics, politics, education, media, and culture; it must also deepen possibilities of individual and collective struggles by fighting for the rebuilding of civil society and the creation of a vast network of democratic public spheres such as schools and the alternative media in order to develop new models of individual and social agency that can expand and deepen the reality of democratic public life. This is a call for a diverse radical party, following Stanley Aronowitzs exhortation, a party that prioritizes democracy as a global task, views hope as a precondition for political engagement, gives primacy to making the political more pedagogical, and understands the importance of the totality of the struggle as it informs and articulates within and across a wide range of sites and sectors of everyday lifedomestically and globally. Democratically minded citizens and social movements must return to the crucial issue of how race, class, power, and inequality in America contribute to the suffering and hardships experienced daily by the poor, people of color, and working and middleclass people. The fight for equality offers new challenges in the process of constructing a politics that directly addresses poverty, class domination, and a resurgent racism. Such a politics would take seriously what it means to struggle pedagogically and politically over both ideas and material relations of power as they affect diverse individuals and groups at the level of daily life. Such struggles would combine a democratically energized cultural politics of resistance and hope with a politics aimed at offering workers a living wage and all citizens a guaranteed standard of living, one that provides a decent education, housing, and health care to all residents of the United States.
PERM SOLVES- POWER IS NOT STATICTHE PLAN CAN BE ACT OF POWER THAT IS CHALLENGING
Dickinson in 04
Edward Ross. Biopolitics, Fascism, Democracy: Some Reflections on Our Discourse About Modernity. Central European History, vol. 37, no. 1, 1 48
This notion is not at all at odds with the core of Foucauldian (and Peukertian) theory. Democratic welfare states are
regimes of power/knowledge no less than early twentieth-century totalitarian states; these systems are not opposites, in the sense that they are two alternative ways of organizing the same thing. But they are two very different ways of organizing it. The concept power should not be read as a universal stifling night of oppression, manipulation, and entrapment, in which all political and social orders are grey, are essentially or effectively the same. Power is a set of social relations, in which individuals and groups have varying degrees of autonomy and effective subjectivity. And discourse is, as Foucault argued, tactically polyvalent. Discursive elements (like the various elements of biopolitics) can be combined in different ways to form parts of quite different strategies (like totalitarianism or the democratic welfare state); they cannot be assigned to one place in a structure, but rather circulate. The varying possible constellations of power in modern societies create multiple modernities, modern societies with quite radically differing potentials.91
23/29
UMKC SDI 2009
Affirmative Answers Link Turn

A Failure to provide social services is the root of the bad aspects of biopower. The plan is necessary to prevent a failed form of biopolitical control their impact cards discuss. Giroux 2006
College Literature 33.3 [Summer2006] Reading Hurricane Katrina: Race, Class, and the Biopolitics of Disposability Soon after Hurricane Katrina hit the Gulf Coast, the consequences of the long legacy of attacking big government and bleeding the social and public service sectors of the state became glaringly evident as did a government that displayed a staggering indifference to human suffering(Herbert 2005). Hurricane Katrina made it abundantly clear that only the government had the power, resources, and authority to address complex undertakings such as dealing with the totality of the economic, environmental, cultural, and social destruction that impacted the Gulf Coast. Given the Bush administrations disdain for the legacy of the New Deal, important government agencies were viewed scornfully as oversized entitlement programs, stripped of their power, and served up as a dumping ground to provide lucrative administrative jobs for political hacks who were often unqualified to lead such agencies. Not only was FEMA downsized and placed under the Department of Homeland Security but its role in disaster planning and preparation was subordinated to the all-inclusive goal of fighting terrorists. While it was virtually impossible to miss the total failure of the government response in the aftermath of Katrina, what many people saw as incompetence or failed national leadership was more than that. Something more systemic and deep-rooted was revealed in the wake of Katrinanamely, that the state no longer provided a safety net for the poor, sick, elderly, and homeless. Instead, it had been transformed into a punishing institution intent on dismantling the welfare state and treating the homeless, unemployed, illiterate, and disabled as dispensable populations to be managed, criminalized, and made to disappear into prisons, ghettos, and the black hole of despair. The Bush administration was not simply unprepared for Hurricane Katrina as it denied that the federal government alone had the resources to address catastrophic events; it actually felt no responsibility for the lives of poor blacks and others marginalized by poverty and relegated to the outskirts of society. Increasingly, the role of the state seems to be about engendering the financial rewards and privileges of only some members of society, while the welfare of those marginalized by race and class is now viewed with criminal contempt. The coupling of the market state with the racial state under George W. Bush means that policies are aggressively pursued to dismantle the welfare state, eliminate affirmative action, model urban public schools after prisons, aggressively pursue anti-immigrant policies, and incarcerate with impunity Arabs, Muslims, and poor youth of color. The central commitment of the new hyper-neoliberalism is now organized around the best way to remove or make invisible those individuals and groups who are either seen as a drain or stand in the way of market freedoms, free trade, consumerism, and the neoconservative dream of an American empire. This is what I call the new biopolitics of disposability: the poor, especially people of color, not only have to fend for themselves in the face of lifes tragedies but are also supposed to do it without being seen by the dominant society. Excommunicated from the sphere of human concern, they have been rendered invisible, utterly disposable, and heir to that army of socially homeless that allegedly no longer existed in color-blind America.
24/29
UMKC SDI 2009
Affirmative Answers Link Turn

The plan is a way to challenge the binary exclusion of those living in poverty. It solves the impact of biopower better than the status quo or the alternative. Briggi 2005
Charles L. Briggs Department of Anthropology, University of California, Berkeley, California Annu. Rev. Anthropol. 2005. 34:26991 Communicability, Racial Discourse, and Disease
The more easily objects of scientific knowledge can circulate through spheres of communicability, the less freedom people seem to enjoy in traveling between communicable loci. Leading scientists can take a step down the communicability chain, reproducing knowledge in popular publications and broadcasts, often generating collegial suspicion. It is much more difficult to move up the chain. The power of communicable borders to facilitate circulation of knowledge and scientific objects and obstruct that of people strikingly parallels the reconfiguration of national borders as open to capital and goods and selectively closed to people (see Nivens 2002). Communicable inequalities operate microscopically, in shaping where people are placed within clinics in relationship to charts, computers, and diagnoses, and macroscopically, in shaping who gets to be a doctor, who gets to define health and disease, who receives access to health care, and, ultimately, who lives and dies (Hunt 1999; Vaughan 1991; Waitzkin 1983, 1991). Communicability operates through coercion (such as quarantines, medical examinations of immigrants, and prosecutions for fetal endangerment), policies and guidelines (immigration and welfare reforms and NIH funding guidelines, for example), and governmentality. My argument is not that communicability constitutes a totalizing system that reaches everywhere and shapes all social relations and modes of thought and action. Spheres are multiple, standing in relations of complementarity and competition. Their penetration is never completethey are rather cut (Strathern 1996) and constrained by limits, some of which they themselves impose by virtue of their own boundary work. Some social sectors lack the symbolic resources needed even to construct themselves as marginal. Ironically, while they regulate how scientific objects and events can be discovered and reported, spheres of communicability become dependent on those very objects and events (Rabinow 1999). Epidemics and organ transplants, for example, offer opportunities for extending biocommunicability, but they render existing formations precarious and lead to their critical scrutiny and possible transformation. In another apparent contradiction, communicability is contingent on peoples willingness to interpellate themselves in suitable wayslest would-be spheres become irrelevant or ridiculous. Nevertheless, the ability of individuals and communities to place themselves in communicable circuits, to draw on available technologies, to position themselves in favorable locations, and to resist oppressive spheres is shaped by and shapes access to capital, symbolic and material. In short .
25/29
UMKC SDI 2009
Affirmative Answers
The Alternative would result in dramatic cuts to social service program leaving those in poverty to die. The alternative is merely a conservative attempt to secure resource otherwise allocated to the poor while the state allows for their death. Giroux 2006
College Literature 33.3 [Summer2006] Reading Hurricane Katrina: Race, Class, and the Biopolitics of Disposability
The neoliberal efforts to shrink big government and public services must be understood both in terms of those who bore the brunt of such efforts in New Orleans and in terms of the subsequent inability of the government to deal adequately with Hurricane Katrina. Reducing the federal governments ability to respond to
social problems is a decisive element of neoliberal policymaking, as was echoed in a Wall Street Journal editorial that argued without irony that taxes should be raised for low-income individuals and families, not to make more money available to the federal government for addressing their needs but to rectify the possibility that they might not be feeling a proper hatred for the government(Qtd.in Krugman 2002,31).If the poor can be used as pawns in this logic to further the political attack on big government, it seems reasonable to assume that those in the Bush administration who hold such a position would refrain from using big government as quickly as possible to save the very lives of such groups,as was evident in the aftermath of Katrina. The vilification of the social state and big governmentreally an attack on non-military aspects of governmenthas translated into a steep decline of tax revenues, a massive increase in military spending, and the growing immiseration of poor Americans and people of color. Under the Bush administration, Census Bureau figures reveal that since 1999,the income of the poorest fifth of Americans has dropped 8.7 percent in inflation-adjusted dollars ...[and in 2005] 1.1 million were added to the 36 million already on the poverty rolls(Scheer 2005). While the number of Americans living below the poverty line is comparable to the combined populations of Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, Texas, and Arkansas, the Bush administration chose to make in the 2006 budget $70 billion in new tax cuts for the rich while slashing programs that benefit the least fortunate (Legum et al 2005). Similarly, the projected $2.7 trillion budget for 2007 includes a $4.9 billion reduction in health funds for senior citizens (Medicare) and the State Childrens Health Insurance Program; a $17 million cut in aid for child support enforcement; cutbacks in funds for low-income people with disabilities; major reductions in child-care and development block grants; major defunding for housing for low-income elderly; and an unprecedented rollback in student aid. In addition, the 2007 budget calls for another $70 billion dollars in tax cuts most beneficial to the rich and provides for a huge increase in military spending for the war in Iraq (Weisman 2006,A10). While President Bush endlessly argues for the economic benefits of his tax cuts, he callously omits the fact that 13 million children are living in poverty in the United States,4.5 million more than when Bush was first inaugurated(Scheer 2005).And New Orleans had the third highest rate of children living in poverty in the United States (Legum et al 2005).The illiteracy rate in New Orleans before the flood struck was 40 percent; the embarrassingly ill-equipped public school system was one of the most underfunded in the nation. Nearly 19 percent of Louisiana residents lacked health insurance, putting the state near the bottom for the percentage of people without health insurance. Robert Scheer,a journalist and social critic, estimated that one-third of the 150,000 people living in dire poverty in Louisiana were elderly, left exposed to the flooding in areas most damaged by Katrina (2005). It gets worse. In an ironic twist of fate, one day after Katrina hit New Orleans, the U.S. Census Bureau released two important reports on poverty, indicating that Mississippi (with a 21.6 percent poverty rate) and Louisiana (19.4 percent) are the nations poorest states, and that New Orleans (with a 23.2 percent poverty rate) is the 12th poorest city in the nation.[Moreover,] New Orleans is not only one of the nations poorest cities, but its poor people are among the most concentrated in poverty ghettos. Housing discrimination and the location of government-subsidized housing have contributed to the citys economic and racial segregation (Dreier 2005).Under neoliberal capitalism, the attack on politically responsible government has only been matched by an equally harsh attack on social provisions and safety nets for the poor. And in spite of the massive failures of market-driven neoliberal policiesextending from a soaring $420 billion budget deficit to the underfunding of schools, public health, community policing, and environmental protection programsthe reigning right-wing orthodoxy of the Bush administration continues to give precedence to private financial gain and market determinism over human lives and broad public values(Greider 2005).
26/29
UMKC SDI 2009
Affirmative Answers.
Your Nazism or genocide impact is ridiculous Biopower can be emancipating. The biopower you criticize is not the biopower that provides social services.
Dickinson in 04
Again, the point here is not that any of the interpretations offered in these pieces are wrong; instead, it is that we are, collectively, so focused on unmasking the negative potentials and realities of modernity that we have constructed a true, but very one-sided picture. The pathos of this picture is undeniable, particularly for a generation of historians raised on the Manichean myth forged in the crucible of World War II and the Cold War of the democratic welfare state. And as a rhetorical gesture, this analysis works magnificently we explode the narcissistic selfadmiration of democratic modernity by revealing the dark, manipulative, murderous potential that lurks within, thus arriving at a healthy, mature sort of melancholy. But this gesture too often precludes asking what else biopolitics was doing, besides manipulating people, reducing them to pawns in the plans of technocrats, and paving the way for massacre. In 1989 Detlev Peukert argued that any adequate picture of modernity must include both its achievements and its pathologies social reform as well as Machbarkeitswahn, the growth of rational relations between people as well as the swelling instrumental goal-rationality, the liberation of artistic and scientific creativity as well as the loss of substance and absence of limits [Haltlosigkeit].65 Yet he himself wrote nothing like such a balanced history, focusing exclusively on Nazism and on the negative half of each of these binaries; and that focus has remained characteristic of the literature as a whole. What I want to suggest here is that the function of the
rhetorical or explanatory framework surrounding our conception of modernity seems to be in danger of being inverted. The investigation of the history of modern biopolitics has enabled new understandings of National Socialism; now we need to take care that our understanding of National Socialism does not thwart a realistic assessment of modern biopolitics. Much of the literature leaves one with the sense that a modern world in which mass murder is not happening is just that: a place where something is not yet happening. Normalization is not yet giving way to exclusion, scientific study and classification of populations is not yet giving way to concentration camps and extermination campaigns. Mass murder, in short, is the historical problem; the absence of mass murder is not a problem, it does not need to be investigated or explained.
27/29
UMKC SDI 2009
Affirmative Answer
EVEN IF YOU WIN A LINK - BIOPOWER DOES NOT FUNCTION IN THE PLAN THE SAME AS NAZI GERMANY YOU DO NOT HAVE AN IMPACT
Dickinson in 04 Edward Ross. Biopolitics, Fascism, Democracy: Some Reflections on Our Discourse About Modernity. Central European History, vol. 37, no. 1, 148 In short, the continuities between early twentieth-century biopolitical discourse and the practices of the welfare state in our own time are unmistakable. Both are instances of the disciplinary society and of biopolitical, regulatory, social-engineering modernity, and they share that genealogy with more authoritarian states, including the National Socialist state, but also fascist Italy, for example. And it is certainly fruitful to view them from this very broad perspective. But that analysis can easily become superficial and misleading, because it obfuscates the profoundly different strategic and local dynamics of power in the two kinds of regimes. Clearly the democratic welfare state is not only formally but also substantively quite different from totalitarianism. Above all, again, it has nowhere developed the fateful, radicalizing dynamic that characterized National Socialism (or for that matter Stalinism), the psychotic logic that leads from economistic population management to mass murder. Again, there is always the potential for such a discursive regime to generate coercive policies. In those cases in which the regime of rights does not successfully produce health, such a system can and historically does create compulsory programs to enforce it. But again, there are political and policy potentials and constraints in such a structuring of biopolitics that are very different from those of National Socialist Germany. Democratic biopolitical regimes require, enable, and incite a degree of self-direction and participation that is functionally incompatible with authoritarian or totalitarian structures. And this pursuit of biopolitical ends through a regime of democratic citizenship does appear, historically, to have imposed increasingly narrow limits on coercive policies, and to have generated a logic or imperative of increasing liberalization. Despite limitations imposed by political context and the slow pace of discursive change, I think this is the unmistakable message of the really very impressive waves of legislative and welfare reforms in the 1920s or the 1970s in Germany.
28/29
UMKC SDI 2009
Affirmative Answer
Biopower leads to medical advances that save lifes.History proves
Dickinson in 04
Of course, at the most simple-minded level, it seems to me that an assessment of the potentials of modernity that ignores the ways in which biopolitics has made life tangibly better is somehow deeply flawed. To give just one example, infant mortality in Germany in 1900 was just over 20 percent; or, in other words, one in every five children died before reaching the age of one year. By 1913, it was 15 percent; and by 1929 (when average real purchasing power was not significantly higher than in 1913) it was only 9.7 percent.93 The expansion of infant health programs an enormously ambitious, bureaucratic, medicalizing, and sometimes intrusive, social engineering project had a
great deal to do with that change. It would be bizarre to write a history of biopolitical modernity that ruled out an appreciation for how absolutely wonderful and astonishing this achievement and any number of others like it really was. There was a reason for the Machbarkeitswahn of the early twentieth century: many marvelous things were in fact becoming machbar. In that sense, it is not really accurate to call it a Wahn (delusion, craziness) at all; nor is it accurate to focus only on the inevitable frustration of delusions of power. Even in the late 1920s, many social engineers could and did look with great satisfaction on the changes they genuinely had the power to accomplish.
Your alternative will fail Resistance to the biopolitics of the state will not end biopowerMultiple avenues exists for biopolitical control Dickinson in 04
Edward Ross. Biopolitics, Fascism, Democracy: Some Reflections on Our Discourse About Modernity. Central European History, vol. 37, no. 1, 148
In any case, the focus on the activities and ambitions of the social engineers in the literature on biopolitical modernity has begun to reach the point of diminishing returns. In the current literature, it seems that biopolitics is almost always acting on (or attempting to act on) people; it is almost never something they do. This kind of model is not very realistic. This is not how societies work. The example of the attempt to create a eugenic counseling system in Prussia should be instructive in this respect. Here public health and eugenics experts technocrats tried to impart their sense of eugenic crisis and their optimism about the possibility of creating a better race to the public; and they successfully mobilized the resources of the state in support of their vision. And yet, what emerged quite quickly from this effort was in fact a system of public contraceptive advice or family planning. It is not so easy to impose technocratic ambitions on the public, particularly in a democratic state; and on the ground, at the level of interactions with actual persons and social groups, public policy often takes on a life of its own, at least partially independent of the fantasies of technocrats. This is of course a point that Foucault makes with particular clarity. The power of discourse is not the power of manipulative elites, which control it and impose it from above. Manipulative elites always face resistance, often effective, resistance. More important, the power of discourse lies precisely in its ability to set the terms for such struggles, to deny what they are about, as much as what their outcomes are. As Foucault put it, power including the power to manage life comes from everywhere.105 Biomedical knowledge was not the property only of technocrats, and it could be used to achieve ends that had little to do with their social-engineering schemes.106 Modern biopolitics is a multifaceted world of discourse and practice elaborated and put into practice at multiple levels throughout modern societies. And of course it is often no less economisticno less based on calculations of cost and benefitat the level of the individual or family than it is in the technocrats visions of national efficiency .
29/29

Index: Umkc Sdi 2009 Starter Pack Biopower

Caricato da

Informazioni sul documento

Descrizione originale:

Titolo originale

Copyright

Formati disponibili

Condividi questo documento

Condividi o incorpora il documento

Opzioni di condivisione

Hai trovato utile questo documento?

Questo contenuto è inappropriato?

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Index: Umkc Sdi 2009 Starter Pack Biopower

Caricato da

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

UMKC SDI 2009

Starter Pack Biopower

UMKC SDI 2009

Starter Pack Biopower

UMKC SDI 2009

Starter Pack Biopower

Continued on the Next Page

UMKC SDI 2009

Starter Pack Biopower

UMKC SDI 2009

Starter Pack Biopower

Link Extensions General

UMKC SDI 2009

Starter Pack Biopower

Link Extensions General

UMKC SDI 2009

Starter Pack Biopower

Link Extensions Disability Programs

UMKC SDI 2009

Starter Pack Biopower

Link Extensions Welfare Reform

UMKC SDI 2009

Starter Pack Biopower

UMKC SDI 2009

Starter Pack Biopower

Link Extensions Homeless

UMKC SDI 2009

Starter Pack Biopower

Link Extensions Statistical Data

UMKC SDI 2009

Starter Pack Biopower

Link Extensions Job Programs

UMKC SDI 2009

Starter Pack Biopower

Link Extensions Medical (General)

UMKC SDI 2009

Starter Pack Biopower

Link Extensions Medical (HIV)

UMKC SDI 2009

Starter Pack Biopower

Link Extensions Medical Asst. for the Elderly

UMKC SDI 2009

Starter Pack Biopower

Link Extension Medical (Prenatal Care)

UMKC SDI 2009

Starter Pack Biopower

Impact Extension - Genocide

UMKC SDI 2009

Starter Pack Biopower

Impact Extension Racism

UMKC SDI 2009

Starter Pack Biopower

Impact Extension Dehumanization

UMKC SDI 2009

Starter Pack Biopower

UMKC SDI 2009

Starter Pack Biopower

UMKC SDI 2009

Starter Pack Biopower

UMKC SDI 2009

Starter Pack Biopower

Affirmative Answers - Permutation